Proposal for 45-Metre Buildings in Bali Warned of Potential 'Chaos'

The proposal to allow buildings up to 45 metres in height in Bali has reignited controversy. Academic I Putu Gede Suyoga of the Bali Institute of Design and Business warned that relaxing regulations could lead to spatial planning chaos without strong governance. ‘If 45-metre buildings are permitted without proper governance, chaos will follow,’ Suyoga said during a discussion forum titled ‘Bali Sky and Building Height Limits’ organised by the Center for Dharmatic Studies (CDS) on Thursday, 28 May 2026. He stressed that the debate transcends technical spatial planning, touching on cultural identity, spiritual landscapes, and Bali’s future amid rising investment and development pressures. The proposal resurfaced in April 2026 after Bali Regional House of Representatives’ Special Committee on Spatial Planning, Assets, and Licensing (Pansus TRAP) suggested a Value-Based Special Height Zoning concept. Under the plan, the general 15-metre building height limit would remain, but areas including Nusa Dua, South Kuta, parts of Sanur, Tabanan coastline, and Gianyar could allow structures up to 45 metres. Pansus TRAP argued the policy is needed due to escalating land pressure, soaring property prices, growing investment demands, and to curb horizontal development that exacerbates spatial planning violations. However, the proposal faced immediate criticism. PHDI Bali Chairman I Nyoman Kenak urged the government not to rush, calling the jump from 15 to 45 metres too drastic and a threat to Balinese cultural and spiritual values. Paddy Fields Eroding as South Bali Grows Denser Suyoga explained Bali’s current situation differs vastly from 20-30 years ago, with South Bali facing intensified development pressures due to urban sprawl. Productive paddy fields continue to be converted into villas, hotels, and commercial zones, while demand for modern urban facilities—such as vertical housing, hospitals, educational centres, integrated parking, and mixed-use areas—rises. He noted Bali’s tourism model is shifting towards a metropolitan tourist city. Suyoga acknowledged supporters of the height revision present rational arguments: the 15-metre limit drives horizontal spread, causing villas and hotels to encroach on agricultural land, worsening traffic, and uncontrolled land consumption. However, he emphasised that allowing 45-metre buildings carries significant risks, including loss of Bali’s visual identity, threats to taksu and sacred spiritual spaces, strain on clean water infrastructure, and rising property speculation that could displace locals from economic hubs. He also highlighted ecological threats such as earthquakes, coastal erosion, flooding, and water shortages that could worsen without adequate infrastructure for vertical development. Suyoga noted tall structures are not new to Bali, having existed since the 8th to 19th centuries and even during colonial times. Early Balinese architecture used tall buildings as cosmic replicas, particularly mountain representations in meru temples. During the Bali Madya era and Majapahit influence, vertical concepts evolved in sacred and symbolic architecture. ‘The issue isn’t building height but chaotic spatial planning, uncontrolled development, and traffic,’ he said. Building Height Rules Debated Since 1970s Suyoga reminded that Bali’s building height debate is not new, with regulations discussed since the 1970s when Bali emerged as an international tourism destination. The principle of a 15-metre limit, roughly coconut tree height, remains relevant due to its ties to customs, culture, and spiritual landscapes. ‘Bali does not require total liberalisation to 45 metres across all areas,’ he stated. He called for selective regulatory reform through special zoning in specific metropolitan areas, transit zones, modern business districts, or parts of tourist zones like Nusa Dua and South Kuta, with thorough ecological assessments and strict development controls. ‘High-rises for whom?’ he questioned. Suyoga also highlighted the marginalisation of indigenous communities when facing formal laws and large-scale investment interests. He stressed that indigenous voices must be heard to avoid being overshadowed by global investment logic. ‘Bali’s future is a shared responsibility,’ he said. He urged lawmakers to thoroughly examine the issue before deciding on height regulation revisions. In response to questions about preventing ecological destruction, Suyoga stressed the need for objective and independent environmental impact assessments. ‘EIA must be clear. The EIA team must be competent, impartial, and objective in assessing potential phenomena,’ he stressed.